Karnataka High Court
Kum C Richa Sonu vs Sri G Krishnappa on 7 December, 2023
-1-
NC: 2023:KHC:44477
MFA No. 7477 of 2013
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 7TH DAY OF DECEMBER, 2023
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE CHILLAKUR SUMALATHA
MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO.7477 OF 2013(MV-I)
BETWEEN:
KUM. C. RICHA SONU,
D/O CHANDRAPPA
AGED ABOUT 11 YEARS
SINCE MINOR BEING REP.
BY HER FATHER CUM NATURAL GUARDIAN,
SRI CHANDRAPPA
S/O RAMAIAH, AGED ABOUT 37 YEARS,
R/A BEHIND BALE CHANGAPPA SCHOOL
SANTHE MAIDAN, MULBAG TOWN,
KOLAR DISTRICT
...APPELLANT
(BY SRI. SUGUNA R REDDY, ADVOCATE)
AND:
Digitally signed 1. SRI. G. KRISHNAPPA,
by VINUTHA B S
Location: HIGH S/O LATE GOPALAPPA
COURT OF
KARNATAKA MAJOR IN AGE
R/A NO.45, KRISHNAIANNAPALYA,
BEHIND NGEF, BANGALORE - 560038
2. THE BRANCH MANAGER
TATA AIG GENERAL INSURANCE COMP. LTD.
2ND FLOOR, J.P. & DEVALAMBIKESWAR ARCADE,
NO.69, MILLERS ROAD, BENGALURU 560052
...RESPONDENTS
(BY SMT. Y ARUNA, ADVOCATE FOR
SRI. K. KISHORE KUMAR REDDY, ADVOCATE FOR R2;
R-1, SERVED UNREPRESENTED)
-2-
NC: 2023:KHC:44477
MFA No. 7477 of 2013
THIS MFA FILED U/S 173(1) OF MV ACT AGAINST THE
JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED 07.8.2012 PASSED IN
MVC NO.7584/2010 ON THE FILE OF THE 9TH ADDITIONAL
SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE, MEMBER, MACT-7, COURT OF SMALL
CAUSES, BANGALORE, PARTLY ALLOWING THE CLAIM
PETITION FOR COMPENSATION AND SEEKING ENHANCEMENT
OF COMPENSATION.
THIS APPEAL, COMING ON FOR FINAL HEARING, THIS
DAY, THE COURT DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
JUDGMENT
Heard Smt.Suguna R.Reddy, learned counsel for the
appellant as well as Smt.Y.Aruna who represents Sri.K.Kishore
Kumar Reddy, learned counsel on record for respondent No.2.
Despite of service of notice, none appears for respondent No.1.
2. This is a claimant's appeal. The claimant is
challenging the order of the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal,
Bengaluru, in MVC No.7584/2010 dated 07.08.2012. The
appellant who was represented by her father was awarded
compensation of Rs.65,500/- as against the claim of
Rs.5,00,000/-. Aggrieved by the quantum that is awarded as
compensation, the present appeal is preferred.
3. Learned counsel for the appellant mainly argued on
the aspect of failure on part of the Tribunal in considering the
NC: 2023:KHC:44477
loss of marriage prospects, the aspect of disfigurement and
also the pain the appellant suffered due to grievous and other
injuries sustained. Learned counsel states that on each head
there is requirement of enhancement of compensation. Learned
counsel also states that no amount is awarded towards loss of
amenities in life.
4. Learned counsel appearing for respondent No.2 on
the other hand states that the appellant failed to establish the
aspect of permanent disability and the requirement of any
further surgery and therefore no amount is awarded under
those heads and thus the order of the Tribunal needs no
interference.
5. As per the version of the appellant due to the
injuries sustained by a road traffic accident, she sustained
grievous injuries and lot of expenditure was incurred for
treatment and therefore, she is entitled to a sum of
Rs.5,00,000/- as compensation.
6. As per the contents of Ex.P5- wound certificate, the
appellant sustained lacerated wound measuring 10 x 5 cms. on
the medial aspect of the left thigh till knee joint which is simple
NC: 2023:KHC:44477
in nature. She also sustained a degloving injury involving flexor
aspect of left fore arm from elbow to wrist which is grievous in
nature.
7. The guardian of the appellant was examined as PW1
and one M.B.Srinivas was examined as PW2. The evidence of
PW2 is that he is working as Office Staff at R.L.Jalappa
Hospital, Kolar. The appellant was admitted as an inpatient at
their hospital on 17.09.2010 and she was discharged on
25.10.2010. As rightly contended by the learned counsel
appearing for respondent No.2, for the reasons best known the
appellant has not examined any of the doctors who treated her.
There is no material to show that she became permanently
disabled. Equally there is lack of proof to show that she
requires any further surgery. However, having considered the
nature of injuries sustained, this Court is of the view that the
amount awarded as compensation under different heads by the
Tribunal is grossly low. The Tribunal awarded a sum of
Rs.20,000/- towards pain and suffering, Rs.7,500/- towards
medical expenses and hospital charges, Rs.30,000/- towards
disfigurement, Rs.3,000/- towards attendant charges,
NC: 2023:KHC:44477
Rs.5,000/- towards conveyance, nutritious food and diet, in
total Rs.65,500/-.
8. Having considered the nature of injuries sustained
and the period in which the appellant remained at hospital and
further taking into consideration the fact that the appellant
being a girl would suffer loss of amenities in life and marriage
prospects to certain extent, this Court is of the view that a just
compensation which the appellant is entitled to under each
head is as under:
Sl. Description Amount
No Rs.
1 Compensation for pain and
sufferings for the simple
40,000
and grievous injury
sustained
2 Medical expenses 7,500
3 Compensation for
30,000
disfigurement
4 Attendant charges 10,000
5 For conveyance, extra
5,000
nourishment and diet
6 Loss of amenities in life and
30,000
loss to marriage prospects
Total Compensation Rs.1,22,500
NC: 2023:KHC:44477
9. Thus, the following
ORDER
(i) The appeal is allowed in part.
(ii) The amount awarded as compensation by the
Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Bengaluru,
through orders in MVC No.7584/2010 dated
07.08.2012 is enhanced from Rs.65,500/- to
Rs.1,22,500/-.
(iii) The enhanced amount shall carry the same
interest as held by the Tribunal.
Sd/-
JUDGE
AP
CT:TSM
